Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Amarjit Singh

DRT27 Apr 2026OA/1367/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this debt recovery proceeding, the Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's claim for outstanding dues of approximately ₹23.82 Lakhs with interest against the respondents. The respondents failed to appear despite summons. The Tribunal confirmed the loan advance, approved the recovery application, ordered the issuance of a recovery certificate, and fixed a future date to distribute sale proceeds fr

What did the court decide?

Application for recovery of ₹23,82,126 with interest allowed. Recovery Certificate issued. Sale of mortgaged land directed to recover dues.

Hdfc Bank versus Amarjit Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1367/2022 Date of Institution: 01.07.2022 Date of Decision: 27.04.2026

¶4

HDFC Bank Limited having its branches all over India and a branch at Maur Mandi, District Bathinda, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Amarjit Singh s/o Sh. Gurnam Singh, r/o Village Rajgarh Kubbe, Tehsil Maur, District Bathinda, Punjab.

¶8

Gurjit Singh s/o Sh. Gurnam Singh, r/o Village Rajgarh Kubbe, Tehsil Maur, District Bathinda, Punjab.

¶9

Gurnam Singh s/o Sh. Tota Singh, r/o Village Rajgarh Kubbe, Tehsil Maur, District Bathinda, Punjab.

¶10

……….Defendants

¶11

Advocates

¶12

Sh. J. S. Sehgal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 27.01.2023 .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of ₹23,82,126/- with interest from 01.07.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

HDFC Bank Limited has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹23,82,126/- with interest against Sh. Amarjit Singh and others (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 07.12.2017, it had granted C.C Limit of ₹15.60 Lacs and a Demand Over Draft Limit under Farm Development Loan Scheme of ₹4.30 Lacs to the defendants for agricultural purpose. To secure both the loans, Defendants had mortgaged their land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Both the loan facilities were chargeable at different rates of interest. On 01.10.2021, a sum of

¶17

¶18

₹23,82,126/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 22.07.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 27.01.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶20

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Parampreet Singh Kahlon, Assistant Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A- 13.

¶21

I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of ₹19.90 Lacs (₹15.60 Lacs in C.C. Limit and ₹4.30 Lacs in Demand Over Draft for Farm Development) and on 01.10.2021, a sum of ₹23,82,126/was due.

¶22

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹23,82,126/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Eighty Two Thousand One Hundred Twenty Six Only) i.e. ₹20,42,665/- in C.C. Limit with interest @12% p.a. and ₹3,39,461/- in FDL Account with interest @15% p.a. (both facilities) with half-yearly rests from 01.07.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶23

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶24

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶25

¶26

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 29.05.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties.

¶27

Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 27.04.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Hdfc Bank v. Amarjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Amarjit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus S S T Packaging Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Bank of India versus Ms Box Well Industries

Bank of Maharashtra versus Chandrashekhar Pundlik Jagtap

Bank of Baroda versus Anushka Jain Proprietor Ms Ur Choice

Canara Bank versus Mr R Markondaiah

State Bank of India versus Kavitha. N